The 24-year-old has worked under the likes of Jose Mourinho and Roberto Mancini but it appears Rodgers is the one who has pushed the Italy international furthest out of his comfort zone. “Right now, I think Mario has a very interesting development for his career,” Balotelli’s agent Mino Raiola told RMC. “He has found a coach who asks of him things that had never been requested of him until now, including the discipline of running without the ball. “This allows him to grow as a person and as a football player. He’ll come out even stronger. “He is proud of his team (Liverpool) and that is the most important.” Balotelli has had a less-than-impressive start to his Anfield career after a £16million move from AC Milan in the summer. He has started only once since November 8 – in the Europa League exit to Besiktas last week – and has scored only four goals, all in different competitions, and just one in the Premier League. Having been an unused substitute for the second successive match Balotelli, after the midweek win over Burnley, posted a cryptic message on Instagram. The Italian wrote: “Someone doesn’t like me but differently (sic) of what they say about me I’m a team player and I’m so proud of my team, of this win and of these fans! Let’s keep going. Bravi Ragazzi!!! YNWA !!!” Press Association Mario Balotelli’s agent claims manager Brendan Rodgers is pushing the Liverpool striker further than anyone has before in his career.
Close Forgot password? Please put in your email: Send me my password! Close message Login This blog post All blog posts Subscribe to this blog post’s comments through… RSS Feed Subscribe via email Subscribe Subscribe to this blog’s comments through… RSS Feed Subscribe via email Subscribe Follow the discussion Comments (8) Logging you in… Close Login to IntenseDebate Or create an account Username or Email: Password: Forgot login? Cancel Login Close WordPress.com Username or Email: Password: Lost your password? Cancel Login Dashboard | Edit profile | Logout Logged in as Admin Options Disable comments for this page Save Settings Sort by: Date Rating Last Activity Loading comments… You are about to flag this comment as being inappropriate. Please explain why you are flagging this comment in the text box below and submit your report. The blog admin will be notified. Thank you for your input. -5 Vote up Vote down Love Check Points · 312 weeks ago http://fluoridealert.org/content/communities/ I am against using it. Report Reply 1 reply · active 312 weeks ago +1 Vote up Vote down JustMe · 312 weeks ago Dear “Love Check Points” We don’t care. Signed Wellington City Council. Report Reply -6 Vote up Vote down JustMe · 312 weeks ago Big brother knows best…… Report Reply 0 replies · active 312 weeks ago +9 Vote up Vote down anonymous · 312 weeks ago I seriously dont want anyone other than scientific knowledge types making decisions about our water. How many times the past few years have we received notice that “our water was found to be in violation” printed on the backs of our bills? This council is not qualified and neither are the residents really. This isn’t a taste test anyway…we fail that hands down! Report Reply 0 replies · active 312 weeks ago +7 Vote up Vote down Ted Logan · 312 weeks ago I like when fluoridation issues arise because it makes it easy to find the morons. Report Reply 0 replies · active 312 weeks ago +3 Vote up Vote down guest · 312 weeks ago I like it when things float in the water from the tap and taste funny, says no one ever. Report Reply 0 replies · active 312 weeks ago +2 Vote up Vote down craig · 312 weeks ago Our water is basically dreadful … pseudo Swamp goo… and way overpriced – but at least it will be better for our children’s teeth if we pour fluoride into it? Come on, folks! Report Reply 0 replies · active 312 weeks ago 0 Vote up Vote down Seriously · 311 weeks ago The Mayor has never voted in favor of the people. Nice guy……brainwashed Mayor. Report Reply 0 replies · active 311 weeks ago Post a new comment Enter text right here! Comment as a Guest, or login: Login to IntenseDebate Login to WordPress.com Login to Twitter Go back Tweet this comment Connected as (Logout) Email (optional) Not displayed publicly. Name Email Website (optional) Displayed next to your comments. Not displayed publicly. If you have a website, link to it here. Posting anonymously. Tweet this comment Submit Comment Subscribe to None Replies All new comments Comments by IntenseDebate Enter text right here! Reply as a Guest, or login: Login to IntenseDebate Login to WordPress.com Login to Twitter Go back Tweet this comment Connected as (Logout) Email (optional) Not displayed publicly. Name Email Website (optional) Displayed next to your comments. Not displayed publicly. If you have a website, link to it here. Posting anonymously. Tweet this comment Cancel Submit Comment Subscribe to None Replies All new comments by Tracy McCue, Sumner Newscow â€” Wellington City voters will not be voting this November whether or not to continue the fluoridation of municipal water.The council did not have a majority required to pass an ordinance which would have placed fluoridation as a referendum during the Nov. 4 general election.The vote ended in a 3-3 deadlock with Mayor Roger Stallbaumer declining to cast the needed fourth vote to pass the ordinance. Those voting â€œyesâ€ for an election vote were John Tracy, Jim Valentine and Jan Korte. Those voting â€œnoâ€ against putting it on the ballot was Vince Wetta, John Brand and Kelly Green.Wellington has been fluoridating its water supply since Jan. 3, 1980 when it was passed by an ordinance. For the past 34 years, Wellington has put in one part fluoride to a million parts water.Â Tracy said at a work session a month ago that fluoridation needed to be approved by the voters because recently there was interest by several individuals hoping to end the practice.At Tuesdayâ€™s meeting he stated:â€œI have received some correspondence in favor (of a vote) and correspondence against. To me it is not an issue if fluoride is good, but about giving the public a choice. One of the e-mails I received said it best, â€˜the communities that fluoridate the water by ordinance instead of public vote is effectively medicating our citizens without their permission.â€™ I couldnâ€™t agree more.â€Brand responded:â€œI respect your position, but that is a gross exaggeration saying that we are medicating the public.â€He then read several health studies for the fluoridation of water which included endorsements from the American Dental Association, the Center of Disease Control, U.S. Surgeon Generalâ€™s office, and Oral Health America.â€œI donâ€™t think this should go to a public vote because the people it protects the most are the people who canâ€™t vote because they are not old enough,â€ Brand said.Valentine asked how long they have been putting fluoride in toothpaste and Dr. Gwen Stalcup, who was in the audience, said since the 1950s.When the vote was taken, Stallbaumer had to break the tie and immediately voted no. But City Attorney Mike Brown and interim City Manager Shane Shields had to confer for a few minutes whether or not a mayor can cast a negative vote according to Kansas State Statute.It was determined a mayor can only cast a positive vote. Stallbaumer then stated: â€œI decline to say yes.â€Follow us on Twitter.